Sorry but your definition of theft is wrong. Here’s from that book called “dictionary” for theft:
an unlawful taking (as by embezzlement or burglary) of property
and here’s for stealing:
: to take or appropriate without right or leave and with intent to keep or make use of wrongfully
Violating copy right is unlawful taking of property. There doesn’t have to be a loss, that’s your own false addition to the definition of the word.
I’m not using inflammatory inaccurate language. I’m using TRUE language. Violation of copy right is theft and stealing.
actually it is taking the distribution not the song.
At common law there was no taking of an intelectual property. There was none. Copyright law is a new legislative creation.
Mark Twain was plauged by people SELLING illegal copies of his books and he used to resort to signing every copy to distinguish the authorized from the unauthorized.
Copyright is also limited in scope, hence the fair use rules, educational use rules, and the limited time of the actual copyright exclusivity. (hence Disney keeping the steamboat willie copyright alive by lobbying for copyright extensions. I think 90 years now)
No. "Intellectual property" is a fictional concept. Property is tangible. If you steal some, there is less of it left than before. You cannot steal what does not exist.